Thoughts on P4's increasing popularity?

[Rainsford]

I was talking with a system builder friend of mine who mostly builds computers for the retail stores (but also to larger private customers) and who works for a company that builds about 100-200 systems per week. He said that lately the P4 has been climbing in popularity (all models) and that the number of AMD based systems they sell is dropping fast. I've noticed that among the enthusiast market as well, and not just with overclockers.

I'll admit that I'm puzzled by this. I know that Intel has the advantage of name-brand recognition, but they have always had this, and the trend seems to have cropped up recently. I'm wondering what has changed. I know the release of the Tbred has been less that great so far, but that doesn't make the other AMD chips any worse. It seems like ever since the P4 took back the top performance crown, a lot of people (enthusiasts and "users" alike) are leaving the AMD camp to buy Intel stuff. And not just at the top performance level, at every level.

Do you guys think that this is because Intel has the fastest chip out there, so everyone wants an Intel even if it isn't the fastest? Otherwise I see no reason for an increase in popularity of the slower speed P4's (except overclocking of course). Why would a company rather sell (and why would a consumer rather buy) a more expensive CPU? I know there is always going to be the Intel crowd that are comfortable with Intel and will always buy Intel, but up until recently, companies were selling AMD based computers like never before, especially budget computers. What changed?

And I'm not trying to start a flame war here. The whole Intel vs AMD debate is stupid. I'm just trying to see what you all think about why the P4 is suddenly the chip to have.

 

[mechBgon]

Maybe Intel's move in the direction of DDR-based platforms helped.

 

[jasonjm]

simply put, the p4 is a better product....

the AMD chips are being pushed to their limit. They run hotter, don't overclock as well, and are more greedy with power supplies, and have more compatibility and stability issues overall.

I own 2 x athlon XP machines, but if I had to buy a new machine right now, I would not even look at the athlon XP, unless price was a *super* important factor to me.

AMD is in some major trouble.

 

[CrawlingEye]

P4's OCing a lot higher than AXP's and gaining performance from it, not to mention the P4 NWb chips are beating the AXP's at stock, due to the added bandwidth.

Just the same, not many people are producing AMD chipsets, just via. Via's probably out of the "big 3" the most unstable.
By "big 3" I mean SiS, Via and Intel. Personally, I think SiS has made GREAT enhancements to the P4's with the SiS 645, SiS 645DX and soon to be the SiS 648DX. Not to mention their later-showing chipsets like SiS 660 and SiS 655.

All of these will be released and SiS will still have done nothing for AMD, which IMO really is hurting AMD.
If AMD started making their own chipsets (as it has been rumored that they might) they could very well gain a lot more respect and comfort, particularly with stability and so forth.

Just to show the extent of how SiS is hurting AMD... SiS won't be releasing an AMD chipset until clawhammer, according to the roadmaps I've seen...

 

[BeefcakeVA]

I recently bought a PIV 1.6A to play with and o'c. It will replace my Athlon 1.33Ghz in my main system whenever I get around to buying a new mobo and RAM. To answer your question though, there are several reasons why I'm making the switch after owning no less than 3 AMD chips (went from Pentium 100 -> K6-200 -> K62-400 -> Athlon 1.33):

1) The Athlons (T-bird, Palomino, etc) are hot and don't o'c nearly as well as the latest Intel chips. Not to mention when disaster strikes and my HSF comes off my PIV won't cook itself and maybe the mobo as well. Rare occurence, sure, but chit happens as they say.

2) T-bred is pretty pathetic. Here was an opportunity for AMD to really do something with the Athlon line prior to the Hammer release in Q1 2003 (and I don't think for one minute it will be sooner). What they managed to ship was a die shrink with little appreciable difference from the XP line. Wow.

3) I question the long term viability in this market segment of a company that has to rely on VIA and Sis to produce chipsets for their processors. I've always thought that was a mistake. Quite simply, I'm tired of screwing with VIAs 4-1 drivers, compatibility issues (not many I know but there were some), etc. As much as I didn't use to like it, Intel sets the standards for desktop CPUs.

4) Intel pulled their head out and are actively developing DDR for the desktop I like that. Few people really like Rambus.

This could go on and on so I'll stop here. I hope that Hammer amounts to something for AMD, but I keep questioning a company that has had a killer chip like the Athlon for several years now and still can't make any money (except for one quarter and who knows what they were doing with their books).

 

[Eymar]

I think this a good question to post here since I think most people here will recommend an INTEL solution. This wasn't the case last year and just shows how enthusiasts can sway a market. People who don't know computers too well will generally asked a tech head or the web for advice on what to get. If you look around it's the P4 that's making all the noise while AMD has been bumping their XP line with only speed enhancements. Tech people and web reviewers want something to talk about and the P4 has gone thru some bigger changes such as the Northwood, then 133mhz (which Intel is smart to tout at 533fsb), switch to DDR and so on. Intel has won over AMD people with this, the extreme oc's and maybe more importantly their great mobo chipsets. Honestly I can't tell the difference in speed between my AMD XP2100+ system and my oc'd P4 1.6A @ 2.7Ghz system (with almost same components) when doing the normal stuff (playing games, ripping mp3's, and such). Compiling visual.net and C# programs does have an apparent speed advantage on the Intel setup and some games favor one setup over the other (JKII for Intel is one). Then again no one wants an honest opinion on stuff they want the popular opinion.

 

[AlexKN1]

if you think about ""most of the popularity"" came from the DDR, because they r cheaper solution and some people hate RDRAM.

then the second most important popularity came from performance factor, the 512kb cache and 133fsb.

then third most important factor , is overclocking ability and low heat. (low count, because only i think 20% of all computer users overclock or less)

but i believe Intel choose to go Dual DDR for this fall is because they saw the huge increase in sales with DDR solution, and all those people who don't like RDRAM and don't do DDR because of bandwidth limit will all now choose Dual DDR solultions since they provide even more performance than RDRAM PC1066 and RIMM4200.

Intel will only gain its crown for this year and next year as far as I know.
I don't see any "bad" things intel is doing.

lets sum it up.

- Dual DDR (confirmed)
- In 2003 667mhz BUS (confirmed)
- 64 bit RDRAM (for those who still want RDRAM) (confirmed)
- Hyperthreading (confirmed)
- 1MB L2 Cache (confirmed)
- Increased L1 cache
- Possible 2MB or 3MB of L3 cache
- Possible 64bit support with backward 32bit compatibility
- .09 micron process (confirmed) - overclocking must be godly here

 

[Duvie]

Lets not even talk about ocing cause we here are a small market sector for the northwoods....

Big factors:

INtel is going with industry ddr platform...This helps with a lot of amd converts who didn't need to get new am to run the p4. At one time it was rdram or nothing when rdram was far more costly then pc2100 ddr...Then came a neutered sdram platform that for many was DOA....

Intel has not just won back the crown they won it back with the 2.2ghz p4 northwood and kept just staying ahead until now they have started to pull away with the 2.533ghz p4....I think for many of us we see movement in the intel camp and can't quite figure out the amd camp....The t-breds seem lame and wher are the 2300,2400,&2500 they should be starting to ramp....If intel wanted to they could go t0 2.8ghz by end of august and really start pulling away...


Big factors for me (I am part of the samll enthusiast market but represent many of the amd ppl who after 4 years of amd went intel...I never owned a celeron, P2, or P3...)

1) bang for the buck....I pay 130 dollars for a chip that I have running 133mhz faster then best intel chip out which runs 600 dollars...I run 666fsb and 333mhz ddr (going for 400+ddr soon)

2)noise...damn this system is quiet...half the case fans!!!

3)heat is less then my 1.4 tbird that ran at default and I am running a 1.06ghz oc with .16v vcore adjustments..

4)I see more of a future with current p4 line and dual channel ddr chips...If I had gone xp I clearly viewed it as a dead end as the chip desperatley needs to have a 166fsb...I have never had any luck ocing any athlon chip of mine to stability....

5) Via boards dominate the amd chipsets, and I have had my experiences with them...All you via lovers..shut-up about "I didn't have any"..Well, a lot of ppl did...

 

[AlexKN1]

Originally posted by: Duvie
Lets not even talk about ocing cause we here are a small market sector for the northwoods....

Big factors:

INtel is going with industry ddr platform...This helps with a lot of amd converts who didn't need to get new am to run the p4. At one time it was rdram or nothing when rdram was far more costly then pc2100 ddr...Then came a neutered sdram platform that for many was DOA....

Intel has not just won back the crown they won it back with the 2.2ghz p4 northwood and kept just staying ahead until now they have started to pull away with the 2.533ghz p4....I think for many of us we see movement in the intel camp and can't quite figure out the amd camp....The t-breds seem lame and wher are the 2300,2400,&2500 they should be starting to ramp....If intel wanted to they could go t0 2.8ghz by end of august and really start pulling away...


Big factors for me (I am part of the samll enthusiast market but represent many of the amd ppl who after 4 years of amd went intel...I never owned a celeron, P2, or P3...)

1) bang for the buck....I pay 130 dollars for a chip that I have running 133mhz faster then best intel chip out which runs 600 dollars...I run 666fsb and 333mhz ddr (going for 400+ddr soon)

2)noise...damn this system is quiet...half the case fans!!!

3)heat is less then my 1.4 tbird that ran at default and I am running a 1.06ghz oc with .16v vcore adjustments..

4)I see more of a future with current p4 line and dual channel ddr chips...If I had gone xp I clearly viewed it as a dead end as the chip desperatley needs to have a 166fsb...I have never had any luck ocing any athlon chip of mine to stability....

5) Via boards dominate the amd chipsets, and I have had my experiences with them...All you via lovers..shut-up about "I didn't have any"..Well, a lot of ppl did...

What are you talking about, Intel has released 2.53 133FSB without PC1066 memory, they were so depserate to release it. Its been only 2 months since they released it. You don't expect intel to release products every month?

this month they should be really the next P4

 

[Duvie]

WTF are you talking about!!!

I never said anything to that sort....

What are you talking about, Intel has released 2.53 133FSB without PC1066 memory, they were so depserate to release it. Its been only 2 months since they released it. You don't expect intel to release products every month?

i am not sure what you read!!!

 

[paralazarguer]

Yeah, I'm going to have to go with Duvie on this one. What the F are you talking about? How do your comments relate in any way to what he said?

 

[THUGSROOK]

i think its called BEER

 

[AlexKN1]

Originally posted by: 7757524
Yeah, I'm going to have to go with Duvie on this one. What the F are you talking about? How do your comments relate in any way to what he said?

BEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEER

 

[BD231]

The P4 is better than the Athlon, which is what it was made to be, so that makes me wonder just WHY you posted this Rainsford. I've seen Intel crazed people jump ship when the P3 was no longer able to keep up with the Athlon, this is in effect, is the SAME type of switch that happens with any update in CPU technology. I went Intel because I'm fed up with VIA shipsets and the huge amount of heat the Athlons put out. No average consumer wants a loud computer, and I along with many other enthusiasts dont want to sacrafice silence for performance. Currently Intel is doing a better job in all area's, and the Intel name is making their superior product far more sucessfull.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: bdog231
The P4 is better than the Athlon, which is what it was made to be, so that makes me wonder just WHY you posted this Rainsford. I've seen Intel crazed people jump ship when the P3 was no longer able to keep up with the Athlon, this is in effect, is the SAME type of switch that happens with any update in CPU technology. I went Intel because I'm fed up with VIA shipsets and the huge amount of heat the Athlons put out. No average consumer wants a loud computer, and I along with many other enthusiasts dont want to sacrafice silence for performance. Currently Intel is doing a better job in all area's, and the Intel name is making their superior product far more sucessfull.

I asked the question because I'm wondering why there is a relativly recent increase in P4 popularity, and it has nothing to do with the P4 being a "superior product" as far as I can see. The P4 has been out for a while now (November 2000 as I recall) and it had many of the strengths that consumers look for like less heat, the Intel name, etc. The Northwood didn't come out until January of this year, and even then AMD was still going strong. Now all of a sudden people are dropping AMD like it has the plague or something and I'm unsure why. Some of the people who responded made sense, but I still think there is something to be said with being associated with the highest performing chip right now, even if you don't own it. Just my thoughts on the matter.

Edit: I guess what doesn't make sense to me is why people are buying slower P4 solutions when they weren't at the beginning of the year. You could have bought a Northwood at the beginning of the year, but AMD still had the speed crown at that point. Now Intel's fastest is faster than AMD's fastest and suddenly people are rushing out to buy P4s that have been around since the beginning of the year. What changed?

 

[THUGSROOK]

motherboards and ram improved.
even rdram improved.
the cpus improved too.
knowledge improved too

plus all these reports of 50-66%+ overclocking results musta suddenly put a loud bug in their hot AMD soup.
these werent random isolated results - these were/are still consistant results.

 

[CrawlingEye]

Originally posted by: THUGSROOK
motherboards and ram improved.
even rdram improved.
the cpus improved too.
knowledge improved too

plus all these reports of 50-66%+ overclocking results musta suddenly put a loud bug in their hot AMD soup.
these werent random isolated results - these were/are still consistant results.

Very well put, I got my 1.6a right after I heard the first OC's on it, and as you can see from my profile, I've always been an Intel fan.
So the jump from 1.8 willy to 1.6 NWa was an easy upgrade. Then just last week (or the week before) I got my 2.26b and still have one of the fastest rigs.

My main concern right now is getting a new vid card.

For Rainsford, if you want to see the results of the P4 NW's, go to www.madonion.com and check the 3dmark 2k1SE results. You'll notice that the P4 has first place.

 

[CrazySaint]

Speaking for myself, as recently as a month or so ago, I was planning on having the PC I'm building be an Athlon XP (and really hoping the TBreds would be nice overclockers), but then the TBreds flopped and I kept hearing about people getting 50% overclocks on their 1.6A chips and I decided to switch. I realize that I represent a minority in the market, but that's why I "switched" to Intel (I've never actually owned an AMD CPU but I really wanted to buy one).

 

[BD231]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: bdog231
The P4 is better than the Athlon, which is what it was made to be, so that makes me wonder just WHY you posted this Rainsford. I've seen Intel crazed people jump ship when the P3 was no longer able to keep up with the Athlon, this is in effect, is the SAME type of switch that happens with any update in CPU technology. I went Intel because I'm fed up with VIA shipsets and the huge amount of heat the Athlons put out. No average consumer wants a loud computer, and I along with many other enthusiasts dont want to sacrafice silence for performance. Currently Intel is doing a better job in all area's, and the Intel name is making their superior product far more sucessfull.

I asked the question because I'm wondering why there is a relativly recent increase in P4 popularity, and it has nothing to do with the P4 being a "superior product" as far as I can see. The P4 has been out for a while now (November 2000 as I recall) and it had many of the strengths that consumers look for like less heat, the Intel name, etc. The Northwood didn't come out until January of this year, and even then AMD was still going strong. Now all of a sudden people are dropping AMD like it has the plague or something and I'm unsure why. Some of the people who responded made sense, but I still think there is something to be said with being associated with the highest performing chip right now, even if you don't own it. Just my thoughts on the matter.

Edit: I guess what doesn't make sense to me is why people are buying slower P4 solutions when they weren't at the beginning of the year. You could have bought a Northwood at the beginning of the year, but AMD still had the speed crown at that point. Now Intel's fastest is faster than AMD's fastest and suddenly people are rushing out to buy P4s that have been around since the beginning of the year. What changed?

Better is better. The P4 *IS* a superior product because it offers something no other processor company can right now and it's as simple as that(performance with a low heat output). I personally feel that Intels mature .13m process is a big contributor to the sucesses of the Northwood. One only has to look at the poor heat dissipation of AMD's new T-Bred to respect Intels Northwood. I'm not saying any of this to put down AMD or anyone using AMD. I have a backup machine that uses a Duron(I'm using it right now) so I am by no means an Intel zealot. I think it took people a while to pick up on the Northwood because of how horrible the Willmete(sp) P4 was. Nothing has changed like I said before, the Athlon is getting very dated and it's really starting to show, JUST like the P3. I suggest you get used to this back and forth trend. if AMD's hammer is what it's cracked up to be you'll be seeing a switch just like this one in the near future. It's all part of the game.

 

[mtnbikerjeremiah]

I have always sided with Intel. In the past I do regret not going with AMD for some of the Athlon T-bird processors, since you can unlock them and there has been a larger overclocker market for them. Now once again the tables have turned, now that Intel Pentium 4's are cheaper since they are offered with DDR motherboards and so to be Dual Channel DDR motherboards.

For Intel stability and overclockability from results at www.overclockers.com. Intel has had a pretty good history of overclockable processors and high reliabilty.... see the Celeron 300A, 400... see the Celeron II 566, see the Pentium III 700, 750 and Pentium III 1000 (100fsb). Now see the intel Pentium 1.6A, 1.8A.

AMD is not completely bad, they have their advantages. Intel just finally got with the program, and for the price of things, it makes since not to buy the highest end of Intel processors, just sticking with a 1.6A can give you the most bang of the buck in safe overclocked perfomance as well as stability.

 

[HowDoesItWork]

Good point about the hammer. If it is good, you will see the tide shift again.

IMO, the whole thing boils down to price versus performance. When the P4 first came out it was damn pricey AND you had to buy into RDRAM which was also pricey. To boil it all down, you could buy an athlon system that would met or beat an intel system that cost 4X as much. Now the prices are much more competitive. Intel has slashed prices across the board 4 times in the past 18 months. With the addition of DRAM to intel and AMD still having the need for a high price HSF, the price difference is almost nil.

Enthusiasts will always look around for the best stuff, and I'm not counting AMD out yet...because of the hammer. I think AMD has a much better strategy on this than intel. A 64-bit processor that can run 32-bit applications natively is going to make a lot more sense over the next couple years than a 64-bit 'only' processor (has to run 32-bit applications through emulation). People like stuff that is backward compatible. I think intel made a huge error cancelling Yamhill, but that is just imo. We shall see.

 

[Rainsford]

Hmm, I suppose I was looking at it from the standpoint of a better deal. But I suppose there are other considerations, like heat and overclockability. But I still think the AXP seems to be very competitive, I don't know why so many companies and users are dropping it like it carries the plague. Just seems silly to me, both are good products. Perhaps I should rename this thread, "Thoughts on the decreasing AXP popularity."

 

[mechBgon]

I'd like to address an idea I see repeated in this thread: that P4 CPUs don't put out a lot of heat.

According to www.sandpile.org, the fastest desktop Northwood P4, the 2.53GHz, has a maximum power dissipation of about 77W (at stock speed/voltage), which is higher than any AthlonXP or Thunderbird.

On a clock-for-clock basis, Northwood-core Pentium4's do put out less wattage than AthlonXP's (although Williamette-core models do not). For instance, a 1.6A at 1600MHz has a maximum output of 37W, compared to 68W for a Palomino AthlonXP 1.6GHz, or 52W for a Thoroughbred AthlonXP 1.6GHz (note that's GHz, not PR rating). Then again, on a clock-for-clock basis, a 400MHz-bus Northwood is going to lose badly to an AthlonXP in almost any situation (remember, clock-for-clock, not clock-versus-PR-rating). So the practical thing is to overclock your 1.6A. Just picking Duvie's current setup for an example, it would put out about 92W max, at 166MHz bus, 1.66V and 2.66GHz. Fast? Heck yeah. Low heat output? Compared to an Itanium, maybe

To summarize, there's no free lunch. Pentium4 currently has the lead in performance when cranked up to high clock speeds, but it also has high heat output at those speeds.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: mechBgon
I'd like to address an idea I see repeated in this thread: that P4 CPUs don't put out a lot of heat.

According to www.sandpile.org, the fastest desktop Northwood P4, the 2.53GHz, has a maximum power dissipation of about 77W (at stock speed/voltage), which is higher than any AthlonXP or Thunderbird.

On a clock-for-clock basis, Northwood-core Pentium4's do put out less wattage than AthlonXP's (although Williamette-core models do not). For instance, a 1.6A at 1600MHz has a maximum output of 37W, compared to 68W for a Palomino AthlonXP 1.6GHz, or 52W for a Thoroughbred AthlonXP 1.6GHz (note that's GHz, not PR rating). Then again, on a clock-for-clock basis, a 400MHz-bus Northwood is going to lose badly to an AthlonXP in almost any situation (remember, clock-for-clock, not clock-versus-PR-rating). So the practical thing is to overclock your 1.6A. Just picking Duvie's current setup for an example, it would put out about 92W max, at 166MHz bus, 1.66V and 2.66GHz. Fast? Heck yeah. Low heat output? Compared to an Itanium, maybe

To summarize, there's no free lunch. Pentium4 currently has the lead in performance when cranked up to high clock speeds, but it also has high heat output at those speeds.

Interesting, thanks for the link. So where does everyone get the idea that the P4 is a cool chip even when overclocked?

 

[CrawlingEye]

I think it's in the fact that they're natively cool chips rather than when they're OC'd.
I'm assuming it's just a misunderstanding.